{
  "id": 2968156,
  "name": "James E. Hills, Appellant, v. Joseph Hopp, Appellee",
  "name_abbreviation": "Hills v. Hopp",
  "decision_date": "1916-10-30",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 22,314",
  "first_page": "554",
  "last_page": "555",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "201 Ill. App. 554"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 167,
    "char_count": 2093,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.609,
    "sha256": "69ff284fab46865bbcdd8471748a891af1086da9523964b5e71dd722f5a41fd2",
    "simhash": "1:73eeeab5c2af9cbd",
    "word_count": 334
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:52:04.845486+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "James E. Hills, Appellant, v. Joseph Hopp, Appellee."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice McSurely\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\n2. Contracts, \u00a7 32*\u2014when memoranda not binding as contract. Memoranda made by officials of a corporation for their own convenience- in keeping their records are not binding on strangers who are ignorant of the existence of such memoranda.\n3. Appeal and error, \u00a7 365*\u2014what points not reviewable. Points not made at the trial cannot be made for the first time on review.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice McSurely"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Frederick A. Bangs, for appellant; Richard H. Colby, of counsel.",
      "Burkhalter, Crossberg & Newfield, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "James E. Hills, Appellant, v. Joseph Hopp, Appellee.\nGen. No. 22,314.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Evidence\u2014when exclusion of parol evidence contradicting memorandum erroneous. In an action to recover for breach of a parol contract to repurchase stock assigned by defendant to plaintiff, it appeared that plaintiff received a certain certificate, assigned in blank, and surrendered it for cancellation, receiving a new certificate, and that defendant, who was president of the' corporation issuing the stock, made on the face of the canceled certificate a memorandum, which was never delivered to or seen by plaintiff, to the effect that a new certificate had been delivered to plaintiff in lieu of that which was canceled. Parol evidence of the contract sued on was excluded, on the ground that it contradicted a written instrument, the memorandum being the instrument referred to. Held, that the exclusion was erroneous, the memorandum not being a contract between the parties, for which reason the rule invoked did not apply.\nAppeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Charles N. Goodnow, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1916.\nReversed and remanded.\nOpinion filed October 30, 1916.\nRehearing denied November 13, 1916.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by James B. Hills, plaintiff, against Joseph Hopp, defendant, in the Municipal Court of Chicago, to recover on an alleged verbal agreement to repurchase stock sold to plaintiff. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals.\nFrederick A. Bangs, for appellant; Richard H. Colby, of counsel.\nBurkhalter, Crossberg & Newfield, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0554-01",
  "first_page_order": 596,
  "last_page_order": 597
}